Selfhosted

60723 readers

219 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

Be civil.
No spam.
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
Submission headline should match the article title.
No trolling.
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

curbstickle@anarchist.nexus

curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world

what's the simple way to map services to subdomains instead of specifying the port number? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 5 days ago by laserjet@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have a bunch of services running on my LAN, mostly from a single Debian machine. I access them at URLs like http://devicename.lan:portnumber. I would like to change to http://servicename.devicename.lan.

How it works now: The router (openwrt) sets a static IP per device and the port number is selected by the application or system unit running it.

What is the absolute simplest way to accomplish this? I don't mind if it is managed by the router or by the server machine itself. Hoping for something that can be configured with a text file or web interface or other basic mathod.

These sevices are private, just for me and I have no plans to ever access them externally. I have so far avoided any certificates or SSL or other stuff. I don't use docker and would rather not get into it right now. I like my domain name setup how it is with fake local domains.

Hoping this could be possible without making a whole project out of it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] dislabled@lemmy.ml 1 points 12 hours ago

You're right that IPv6 doesn't need NAT for its original purpose (address scarcity). But "there is no NAT in IPv6" isn't quite accurate: NAT still exists in IPv6

NAT66 (stateful, like NAT44) exists but is discouraged. More relevant is NPTv6, a standardized stateless 1:1 prefix translation, not the many-to-one port-overloaded NAT you're used to from IPv4. It doesn't do address+port multiplexing, so it doesn't break peer-to-peer the way NAT44 does. So the "NAT is the enemy of p2p" argument applies to stateful NAT44-style translation — not really to NPTv6, which preserves end-to-end host addressability and just swaps the prefix.

You can absolutely build a fully functional internal network on ULA (fd00::/8) alone — routing, DNS, services, all independent of any ISP-delegated prefix. But ULA is explicitly non-routable on the public internet, so a pure ULA network is isolated: internal-only, no internet reachability.